Tyson Foods sued over deceptive ‘net-zero’ and ‘climate-smart’ beef claims
Environmental group accuses Tyson of capitalizing on consumers’ interest in purchasing climate-friendly foods by falsely claiming it will be net-zero by 2050 and marketing its industrial beef products as “climate-smart”
An environmental and consumer organization filed a lawsuit today against Tyson Foods, Inc., the second largest meat company in the U.S. and the world, accusing the company of making “false or misleading” marketing claims targeting D.C. consumers concerned about climate change.
The Environmental Working Group filed the suit under the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act, or CPPA, in D.C. Superior Court. The suit targets Tyson’s claims that its industrial meat production operations will reach net-zero greenhouse gas, or GHG, emissions by 2050 and that it produces “climate-smart” beef. EWG is represented by Animal Legal Defense Fund, Earthjustice, Edelson PC, and FarmSTAND.
The lawsuit seeks to stop Tyson from continuing to make these unsubstantiated environmental claims. The groups are calling for Tyson to retract its misleading statements and to be held accountable for violating the CPPA.
Industrialized meat production generates tremendous volumes of climate-warming emissions at every stage of the process, from deforestation and overgrazing to feed production, and from cattle and manure emissions to slaughter and distribution. Industrial beef has a larger climate footprint than any other major food product. Tyson, which produces about 20 percent of U.S. beef, chicken and pork, has GHG emissions that exceed those of Austria or Greece. Its beef production is responsible for 85 percent of the company’s emissions.
Despite the enormous scale of Tyson’s emissions, for over three years, Tyson has been promoting a commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, and for over a year, it has marketed “climate-smart beef.” As the lawsuit alleges, Tyson’s 2022 annual revenues exceed $53 billion, and yet its spending on GHG reduction practices is less than $50 million dollars, which amounts to less than 0.1 percent of its revenue. Tyson spends about eight times as much on advertising as it does on research. Tyson is aware that consumers have an interest in – and are willing to pay more for – climate-friendlier foods, and the company is trying to capitalize on this by taking credit for progress it has not made and has no serious plans to achieve.
According to the lawsuit, Tyson’s net-zero and “climate-smart” beef claims are false or misleading. Tyson’s GHG emissions are enormous, and the company has never tried to fully measure them or has not made any detailed inventory public. Tyson omits key sources of emissions from its public GHG emissions accounting, including land use and land use change associated with grazing and animal feed production. There is no credible evidence that Tyson intends to make any significant changes to its current activities.
The participating organizations released a joint statement:
“Consumers are increasingly making purchasing decisions with their climate footprint in mind. Tyson is exploiting this trend by making outrageous and unsubstantiated claims about its sustainability efforts that simply don’t hold up under scrutiny.
Our lawsuit aims to hold Tyson accountable for misleading consumers about the true nature of its products and their environmental costs. A court order stopping Tyson’s harmful conduct would represent a turning point in the fight to hold the biggest, most powerful contributors to the climate crisis – across industries – accountable for greenwashing.”